336 RAILROAD LEGISLATION AND INVESTIGATION IN WISCONSIN. 



CHAPTER XXII, 



RAILROAD LEGISLATION AND INVESTIGATION IN WISCONSIN. 



RAILROAD LEGISLATION IN WISCONSIN ABSTRACT or THE POTTER LAW ABSTRACT 

 OF REPORT OF COMMISSIONERS NATURE OF THE CONTROVERSY BETWEEN THE 

 PEOPLE AND THE RAILROADS SELF-INTEREST OF CORPORATIONS NOT A SUFFI 

 CIENT GUARANTY AGAINST EXTORTIONS COMPETITION TENDS TO CONSOLIDATION 

 EVILS OF RAILWAY CONSTRUCTION AND MANAGEMENT CAUSES OF UNDUE COST 

 CONSTRUCTION ON CREDIT CORRUPT LETTING OF CONTRACTS MISAPPROPRIA 

 TION OF LAND GRANTS ILLINOIS LAW SUPERVISORY DUTY OF STATES HOLDING 

 LAND GRANTS ILLINOIS DECISION. 



ANOTHER source from which we have drawn largely, is the 

 &quot; First Annual Report of the Railroad Commissioners of the 

 State of Wisconsin,&quot; lately published. 



The people of that State had been eager for railroads. To 

 build the first road, they had mortgaged their farms to the 

 amount of over $4,000,000, and had granted other charters in 

 excess of the real demand, and through unbounded confidence 

 had failed to secure their own interests by proper guaranties. 

 They had been taught by signal experiences the power of rail 

 road corporations over legislatures. So far from being inimical 

 to railroads, the contrary was true. They had suffered long 

 and were kind,&quot; until unjust discrimination in the matter of 

 freights roused their indignation, and hastened the favorable 

 hearing of their complaints. The strength of the Grange made 

 them masters of the situation; a Granger Governor, perfectly 

 familiar with the history of the roads and with legislation, was 

 in the executive chair. This turning of the tables resulted in 

 the passage of what is known as the &quot;Potter Law,&quot; by the Leg 

 islature of 1873-4. This law classified the roads, determined a 

 tariff for fares and freights according to such classification, 

 and affixed severe penalties to its violation. The Supreme 

 Court of the United States had held that the right of a company 

 owning a road, to fix its rate or charges, was an &quot;attribute of 

 ownership.&quot; The railroad companies, therefore, declared the 

 Potter law unconstitutional, and courteously informed the 

 Governor, through their respective presidents, of their deter 

 mination to resist it. The Governor as courteously, in a 

 &quot;proclamation,&quot; announced his intention to enforce it. By 

 successive steps, the case finally reached the Supreme Court. 

 The opinion of Chief Justice Ryan was rendered on the 15th of 



